No more Alberta Beef at Earl's

[pylon]

BS.

The only reason they reversed their decision was because they said "Holy crap, this is going to cost us A LOT of business." If your convictions are so strong and humanitarian, stick by it. But once they saw the bottom line was going to be slaughtered they backed off, and went back to buying the evil Democratic Republic of Northern Alberta beef.

I would have actually had more respect if this clown owner said "I'm standing behind my convictions, and doing what I feel is right." Now, he just makes his whole humane beef thing look like a marketing ploy, not a decision made for altruistic reasons. And all it took was the threat of losing a few dollars to abandoned his morals.

This reversal, make me hate them worse. Losers. Plus their food has always been remarkably overpriced for such mediocre fare anyway.

Earls sucks. LOL

[polak]

lol spineless.

[heep223]

I don't understand the vitriol here.

Their customers and stakeholders put up a big stink about the change, so they listened to them, decided they were right and reversed course. I respect that more than "we don't care what you think, we're right and you're wrong, deal with it".

There was clearly an educational component as well, where they were educated on the fact that AB beef actually is humane in spite of the fact that they're not certified. Now they're going to be working with the AB ranchers on ensuring everything is done with the animals health in mind while keeping their dollars supporting local product.

What is everyone all butthurt about?

[Street Pharmacist]

Some people like to find places to focus the anger they feel

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by pylon

BS.

The only reason they reversed their decision was because they said "Holy crap, this is going to cost us A LOT of business." If your convictions are so strong and humanitarian, stick by it. But once they saw the bottom line was going to be slaughtered they backed off, and went back to buying the evil Democratic Republic of Northern Alberta beef.

I would have actually had more respect if this clown owner said "I'm standing behind my convictions, and doing what I feel is right." Now, he just makes his whole humane beef thing look like a marketing ploy, not a decision made for altruistic reasons. And all it took was the threat of losing a few dollars to abandoned his morals.

This reversal, make me hate them worse. Losers. Plus their food has always been remarkably overpriced for such mediocre fare anyway.

Earls sucks. LOL

The guy you're talking about doesn't make those decisions, he's just the President of the company. Other than that though I agree.

My first thought when I read all of this was that it was stupid. I hated the reason being based around "humane" and it felt like a move based on marketing rather than a move based on quality. Then I decided hell, I'll try it because all that should matter is how it tastes. Low and behold, it was an improvement after all. So now I'm thinking 'hmm. So why the hell wouldn't they just say "we are changing meat suppliers because we found a quality superior to what we had before"' and the answer is the reason the whole thing irked me from the start, the marketing spin being the focus over the food itself. Not something I'll ever agree with.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by pylon

BS.

The only reason they reversed their decision was because they said "Holy crap, this is going to cost us A LOT of business." If your convictions are so strong and humanitarian, stick by it. But once they saw the bottom line was going to be slaughtered they backed off, and went back to buying the evil Democratic Republic of Northern Alberta beef.

I would have actually had more respect if this clown owner said "I'm standing behind my convictions, and doing what I feel is right." Now, he just makes his whole humane beef thing look like a marketing ploy, not a decision made for altruistic reasons. And all it took was the threat of losing a few dollars to abandoned his morals.

This reversal, make me hate them worse. Losers. Plus their food has always been remarkably overpriced for such mediocre fare anyway.

Earls sucks. LOL

Earls will still be buying humane meat. Only thing they'll do different is use different suppliers to get all the meat they need.

Which is kind of weird because there won't be consistency in their steaks which I think a restaurant like Earls should have.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Earls will still be buying humane meat. Only thing they'll do different is use different suppliers to get all the meat they need.

Which is kind of weird because there won't be consistency in their steaks which I think a restaurant like Earls should have.

Very good point, especially at a chain. Consistency is key

[Resolute 14]

They were using multiple suppliers before, so there's no difference there.

The real question, which is unanswered and which Earls is really hoping will never be asked - is how many locations actually get Canadian beef.

[btimbit]

Here's my question then, and try to remove it from this situation entirely. Ignore that nonsense "humane" angle bs and just focus on the product itself.

Would you prefer a restaurant used a local product over one that's superior?

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Here's my question then, and try to remove it from this situation entirely. Ignore that nonsense "humane" angle bs and just focus on the product itself.

Would you prefer a restaurant used a local product over one that's superior?

Superior, every time.

[Red Potato Standing By]

Whose definition of superior?

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

They were using multiple suppliers before, so there's no difference there.

The real question, which is unanswered and which Earls is really hoping will never be asked - is how many locations actually get Canadian beef.

Are you sure about that? I recall reading they only used one supplier and they couldn't keep up.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

Whose definition of superior?

The person eating the steak of course.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Are you sure about that? I recall reading they only used one supplier and they couldn't keep up.

You're right, they had one supplier for a long time. All their steaks were hand cut by the same guy for over a decade. Not just the same company, but the same person at that company. That's another reason this switch was such a big deal, they had worked with that supplier since the 90's

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Zethrynn

Whose definition of superior?

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

The person eating the steak of course.

This. The only bias and deciding factor being your taste buds. Remove every other factor

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Are you sure about that? I recall reading they only used one supplier and they couldn't keep up.

Previously, the Edmonton-area producer, Spring Creek Ranch, was one of the suppliers to Earls’s seven flagship locations across Canada. While the ranch is Certified Humane, they couldn’t meet Earls’s volume needs across Canada, or even for the Edmonton stores. Earls uses more than two million pounds of beef every year. So while Earls’s Edmonton customers can enjoy Certified Humane beef, they will no longer be able to support local beef through their consumer dollars at Earls.

http://edmontonjournal.com/life/food...ed-humane-beef


They were using multiple suppliers prior to this change.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

http://edmontonjournal.com/life/food...ed-humane-beef


They were using multiple suppliers prior to this change.

Sorry I meant just for Alberta

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by btimbit

This. The only bias and deciding factor being your taste buds. Remove every other factor

What about is the better tasting steak was raised using slave labour?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

What about is the better tasting steak was raised using slave labour?

Or if our electronics were produced by child labour?

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

What about is the better tasting steak was raised using slave labour?

Originally Posted by btimbit

This. The only bias and deciding factor being your taste buds. Remove every other factor

It's a hypothetical, but for the sake of argument, what beef supplier use slave labour?